Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

Great link. I may try a bastardized version of Omni+8 this weekend. (Bastardized because I don't have the means to get the figure 8 40 cm in front of the omnis...I may be able to get close to that, though.)

Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

Great link. I may try a bastardized version of Omni+8 this weekend. (Bastardized because I don't have the means to get the figure 8 40 cm in front of the omnis...I may be able to get close to that, though.)

I wonder how the 40cm forward placement for the fig8 works without causing phase issues. Lots of wavelengths in the audible range there. It's not like a Decca Tree where the distance from the mid mic back to the flankers is relatively large.

Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

Great link. I may try a bastardized version of Omni+8 this weekend. (Bastardized because I don't have the means to get the figure 8 40 cm in front of the omnis...I may be able to get close to that, though.)

I wonder how the 40cm forward placement for the fig8 works without causing phase issues. Lots of wavelengths in the audible range there. It's not like a Decca Tree where the distance from the mid mic back to the flankers is relatively large.

I've been holding off typing in this thread because We've donbe about 20 sets with various OMT's this summer and I was hoping to start a discussion about mixing these sources. (Have spoken with Gut about this who of course welcomes the input).HOWEVER, looking at that Omni + 8 I can say you would not have to goo out 40cm, you could just line it up horizontally with the Omni's. Remember the article is for "surround sound" techniques; while using OMT's could be of use when creating surround sound, we are not doing that typically and my experience with Omni plus supercard middle, Omni plus card middle, Omni plus Hyper pair X-Y in the middle tells me you should try this Omni + 8 as I describe, in line with each other.And THANKS to Volt for posting that link, it is very useful.

HOWEVER, looking at that Omni + 8 I can say you would not have to goo out 40cm, you could just line it up horizontally with the Omni's.

That's encouraging to hear because I tried setting it up last night and I can only get my figure 8 about 21 cm in front of the omnis.

I guess the follow-up question is whether, for pure stereo purposes, it would be better to have the figure 8 mic 21 cm in front of the omnis or closer to in line with them? I don't think I can get them exactly in line, but I can get them pretty close.

^^^^^^ doesn't have to be exact.As long as the difference is no more than 20cm it will not be audible. we've been running the ck8 or cards about 10-12 cm in front and there is no problem with phase alignment in post.

Also, on the left side we have two mics with complementary 100Hz high and low pass filters being summed. No such setup on the right side, just the "omni directional" mic. The asymmetry puzzles me. Perhaps that arrangement on the left side creates a single "omni directional" mic and we see it simplified on the right. It baffles science.

Also, on the left side we have two mics with complementary 100Hz high and low pass filters being summed. No such setup on the right side, just the "omni directional" mic. The asymmetry puzzles me. Perhaps that arrangement on the left side creates a single "omni directional" mic and we see it simplified on the right. It baffles science.

I assumed they intended the same arrangement on the right side, but didn't duplicate it just to save space. That's just my assumption though.

Edit: Here is some info on OCT from Schoeps that doesn't include the omnis (interesting that it also provides different recording angles depending on the spacing of the supercards) http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/oct-set

Also, on the left side we have two mics with complementary 100Hz high and low pass filters being summed. No such setup on the right side, just the "omni directional" mic. The asymmetry puzzles me. Perhaps that arrangement on the left side creates a single "omni directional" mic and we see it simplified on the right. It baffles science.

I assumed they intended the same arrangement on the right side, but didn't duplicate it just to save space. That's just my assumption though.

seconded, because if not, then thatjackelliot sure does have a point! (according to the physics I learned)

Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

The Double MS looks interesting, I assume the three mics would be coincident, would the body of the reverse facing cardioid interfere with the front facing one in anyway (reflections, baffling, etc)? I guess you would just use the front facing M as a center channel in a 5.1 scenerio?

gutbucket and I have discussed DBL MS. we have run M/S with a ck8 middle, but never a DBL MS. I am betting for certain applications (Orchestral, ambient, surround recording) with certain mics it rocks.

For logistical reasons I wasn't able to try the omni+8 configuration as it's specified in that Sanken link this weekend. I was only able to get the omnis spread about 20 inches, and the figure 8 was only a couple inches in front of the omnis (there's a picture in the Rig Pictures subforum).

(I suspect, but am not sure, that the battery in my battery box lost some juice part of the way through this song. Maybe I'm crazy, but it seems like the bass drops out a bit around halfway through. I could just be imagining things though.)

Glad to see such a flurry of activity in this thread upon my return (out since last week an eclipse trip to Idaho, just back on-line today), and find it somewhat ironic that this thread was relatively quiet until just last week. I've input on a lot of the posts above and will try to address each over the next few days as I catch up. Cheers to all, and look forward to the discussion..

Just came across this and there are a few arrays I've never seen. The surround-specific setups are probably familiar to many here, but In terms of "oddball" for non-surround recording, I'd really like to try out the Omni+8 setup.

Thanks for that link Volt. Those are all relatively well known and documented "purist" location surround mic'ing techniques. I'll post a link to some free AES papers assessing and comparing these techniques once I can locate them again for those interested in more specifics about them.

Much of what into the development of the oddball arrays I've been playing with over the years is informed by these techniques. I've found some basic core relationships that apply broadly to all these arrays, and based on that I've combined elements from many of these techniques in ways which better apply to the specifics of the recording situations I find myself in. The key is understanding those basic relationships, testing things to confirm the understanding is accurate, and then furthering a more nuanced understanding of specifics. One very useful array not mentioned in the Sanken page which I've found useful in concept and practice is David Gresinger's (acoustics expert, sound engineer, former Lexicon head scientist) array of 5 spaced omnis (or forward pointing directional microphones) in a line across the front of the stage - somewhat unique in that all mics are arranged in a single line, which has unique technical merits as well as being practical in terms of setup. More about that later and how it can be combined with these other techniques.

As a general statement I will say this- These arrays are all primarily intended for 3, 4 or 5-channel stereo playback rather than 2-channel stereo playback. Some "fold down" (mix) to 2-channel stereo better than others. We can get in to why that is, and how to develop a understanding for when they will and when they won't. Yet in general, I've been extremely encouraged regarding how well these techniques or variants on them work when mixing down to 2-channel in comparison to simple dedicated 2-microphone arrays. When chosen wisely, there is typically far more advantage than conflict with regards to 2-channel playback, and when there is a problem it's typically easily mitigated by having total control over the mix. Techniques which work especially well for surround recording are usually advantageous for 2-channel stereo as well in my experience.